Review: The Nightly Show

[Steve Timko]

No reviews of “The Nightly Show.” Isn’t anyone watching it?

It looks okay coming out of the gate. I’m willing to give him a few months to get his bearings. Right now it’s a “The Daily Show” opening followed by a kind of “Politically Incorrect” second and third segments.

I wonder if having the opening desk sequence being like “The Daily Show” is deliberate or if they just don’t know how to do any differently because they all came over from “The Daily Show.” The jokes seem identical to what Jon Stewart would say. I think they need to get something that gives Larry Wilmore a distinctive voice. Too much of a copycat right now.

The panel discussion has mixed results. For me most of the discussion the first night was muddled. Bill Burr stumbled trying to give an elaborate answer to the first question sent his went, but then just went straight for jokes and seemed to do the best. The woman on the first night was terrible. The other two guests didn’t seem to hit their strides.

The second night focused on Bill Cosby and the discussion was much better. I have problems with Wilmore pronouncing Cosby’s guilt and with only qualifying the allegations as allegations a few times. Generally he pronounced Cosby guilty. People had some good things to say about Cosby, although the magazine editor took a little too long to make her point about how Cosby influenced her.

Speaking of which, it’s obvious they edit the show. Some of the cuts are clumsier than others. That may improve with time. I wonder how much they cut it down. What’s the time between it is taped and it airs?

It hasn’t hit its stride yet. Comedy Central made the first four episodes of “The Colbert Report” available on the Comedy Central app and Colbert struggled early on too. If Wilmore can find his own voice in the opening desk talk – or should I say a voice different from Stewart’s – I think the material is there for a good show.

[M-D November]

I'm reserving judgement for a few weeks until Wilmore and his team have a chance to work out the kinks. But so far I like what I see.

Re: the act 1 "anchorlogue", it wasn't uncommon for Stewart and Colbert to hit many of the same notes (if not tell outright identical jokes), so I'm not surprised that there's some overlap between TDS and TNS.

And about Colbert's first few episodes: I remember thinking then that Colbert hit the ground running (in part because the basic framework for the Report was established in the mock promos that ran on TDS), but he needed to work out a way to keep the gimmick going 4 days a week. Similarly, Wilmore's show is informed by TDS work as "senior black correspondent", but aside from a point of view, he's coming at this with a clean slate and, from what I've read, relatively few test shows. But I like the act 2 panel format, and the "Keeping it 100" thing has potential (although they'd be wise to have a wheel of different things to do with the panel in act 3) - let's see where they go from here.

[David Bruggeman]

Likewise, I've enjoyed the two episodes to date, but am waiting a few weeks for the show to find a groove.

With the reliance on contributors and a guest panel, there's a few more working parts here compared to TCR.  I find Wilmore's style relatively low-key, with his jokes coming in under my radar.  I may not laugh as hard as with Stewart or Colbert, but I enjoy Wilmore all the same.

David

---

From: M-D November <mdnov...@gmail.com>
To: tvor...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 11:15 PM
Subject: [TV orNotTV] Review: The Nightly Show

[PGage]

On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 8:15 PM, M-D November <mdnov...@gmail.com> wrote:

I'm reserving judgement for a few weeks until Wilmore and his team have a chance to work out the kinks.  But so far I like what I see.

Re: the act 1 "anchorlogue", it wasn't uncommon for Stewart and Colbert to hit many of the same notes (if not tell outright identical jokes), so I'm not surprised that there's some overlap between TDS and TNS.

And about Colbert's first few episodes: I remember thinking then that Colbert hit the ground running (in part because the basic framework for the Report was established in the mock promos that ran on TDS), but he needed to work out a way to keep the gimmick going 4 days a week.  Similarly, Wilmore's show is informed by TDS work as "senior black correspondent", but aside from a point of view, he's coming at this with a clean slate and, from what I've read, relatively few test shows. But I like the act 2 panel format, and the "Keeping it 100" thing has potential (although they'd be wise to have a wheel of different things to do with the panel in act 3) - let's see where they go from here.

On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 8:46 PM, 'David Bruggeman' via TVorNotTV <tvor...@googlegroups.com> wrote:

Likewise, I've enjoyed the two episodes to date, but am waiting a few weeks for the show to find a groove.

With the reliance on contributors and a guest panel, there's a few more working parts here compared to TCR.  I find Wilmore's style relatively low-key, with his jokes coming in under my radar.  I may not laugh as hard as with Stewart or Colbert, but I enjoy Wilmore all the same.

I mostly agree with what has been said, though perhaps am a little more disappointed than the consensus. I do think the comparison with Colbert's first week is instructive. Colbert came out of the gate hitting homeruns, and clearly had his voice - as M-D states, his challenge was figuring out how to turn that into something sustainable. Wilmore seems to have taken the exact opposite approach, opting for a more sustainable style that is much less distinctive. I don't mind so much the overlap in jokes and subject matter with TDS in Wilmore's Act 1, but I miss very much the distinctive voice he had when on TDS as the SBC - the kind of dry, more cynical, more understated tone. That is almost completely gone on his own show. Of course it helped to have Stewart playing the hapless white guy for him to play off of. I would like to see his Act I focus more on playing off of rigid, one dimensional race-based comments or reporting news clips, which he could undercut and riff off with his old Senior Black Correspondent voice.

I don't know what will come of the round table segments - in general, I am not a fan of this kind of format. I am not a Bill Mahr guy at all. There is too little time to have a real, thoughtful conversation, and there is always too much self-consciousness about getting off some kind of memorable line. I would much rather see him develop a team of 3-5 "experts" (basically series regular cast members, who would be engaging in scripted or at least rehearsed interactions), from different backgrounds, who take turns in Act 2 discussing an issue of the day with Wilmore. Then, in Act 3, they could bring in a real guest, who either Wilmore alone, or in conjunction with the expert from Act 2, could interview.

[David Bruggeman]

FWIW, I think they're trying to achieve the kind of Act 2 you describe.  I've not watched Thursday's episode yet, but it looks like Wilmore did have a segment that was just him and Ricky Velez.

All three of the contributors listed here had screen time with Wilmore this week.

http://www.cc.com/shows/the-nightly-show/contributors

 

David

---

From: PGage <pga...@gmail.com>
To: "tvor...@googlegroups.com" <tvor...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Friday, January 23, 2015 5:08 PM
Subject: Re: [TV orNotTV] Review: The Nightly Show

I don't know what will come of the round table segments - in general, I am not a fan of this kind of format. I am not a Bill Mahr guy at all. There is too little time to have a real, thoughtful conversation, and there is always too much self-consciousness about getting off some kind of memorable line. I would much rather see him develop a team of 3-5 "experts" (basically series regular cast members, who would be engaging in scripted or at least rehearsed interactions), from different backgrounds, who take turns in Act 2 discussing an issue of the day with Wilmore. Then, in Act 3, they could bring in a real guest, who either Wilmore alone, or in conjunction with the expert from Act 2, could interview.

--

[Steve Timko]

They have broken format routinely for the past week or so. Any guesses as to whether they are permanently going with the flexible format or are they trying to see what sticks?

Sent from Type Mail

[PGage]

On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 8:12 AM, Steve Timko <steve...@gmail.com> wrote:

They have broken format routinely for the past week or so. Any guesses as to whether they are permanently going with the flexible format or are they trying to see what sticks?

I have noticed that (though I am down to sampling the show only once or twice a week now). I thought the show was much better when they focus on one or two guests, though they can not do it wall to wall with most guests like he did with de Blasio. I thought the show last on the Ferguson Report was strong, and was well served by a panel, which included some voices you do not normally here on television, though even then they could easily have had 3 panel members instead of 4 (I would have lost the black guy who did not talk about the police starting as a slave patrol).

I am thinking they show might move in the direction of having a panel once a week - maybe on Thursday where they can discuss anything from the week that seems relevant, and also do a panel any night something big or particularly appropriate happens. 

[David Bruggeman]

I think the booking demands on the show are pretty severe.  While Politically Incorrect and/or Real Time are the models here, finding 16 guests a week that can contribute effectively on the topic du jour is just plain tough. 

Real Time aims for pundits (mostly), and airs weekly when in season.  Politically Incorrect was, to my recollection, never a single topic a day show.  If a celebrity wasn't up to speed on one topic, there were usually 2-3 others they might chime in about.  I think going more toward Real Time, while drawing from a different pool of experts, can be more effective.

It seems clear that the show has better luck with panels on certain topics than others.  I think it would be fine if they didn't do a panel every night.  If they can't get the guests, skip the panel.  If you can't find enough, throw in a correspondent if it makes sense.

David

---

From: PGage <pga...@gmail.com>
To: "tvor...@googlegroups.com" <tvor...@googlegroups.com>

Sent: Friday, March 6, 2015 2:40 PM

Subject: Re: [TV orNotTV] Review: The Nightly Show

--

[PGage]

So I just watched the one on the legalization of marijuana, which is the prototype of a panel approach that does NOT work. They are stepping all over each other, and on Wilmore's punchlines, and the whole thing is an uninteresting and embarrassing mess. If they had done that show with the Columbia professor and maybe one other guest it would have been a lot better. 

[PGage]

Wilmore has had a pretty good run lately, so I thought it was a good time to update this thread.

They have begun to find their groove - keeping the panel to the last segment for the most part, and often keeping it smaller. I think it is best with three guests, one of which is one of their regulars (the "My Barbershop" tag feels a little forced to me, but is the right idea).

Wilmore has been all over the Cosby story, and in some ways he owns it (which must be a big relief to Jon Stewart, who I'm sure did not want to go out with a comic icon's blood all over his hands). I think Wilmore is best with stories like this, and the ongoing police violence issue, not so much because they are "black" stories, but because he is able to confidently assert his own specific POV. When he is too generic he begins to wobble - his jokes and delivery are not really sharp or distinctive enough to just stand on their own. But when he gets up a head of steam in the service of something he really has committed to, he is a force. His whole "Obama Don't Care" thing is pretty hilarious. The more he can both bust white people on their bullshit, bust black people on their bullshit, and parlay that into a general calling bullshit POV, the better off he is.


The Panel with Penn Jillette last night was pretty good - I found it encouraging that it was set up for some real disagreement - many of the panels are just an echo chamber, with dissents only made for comic effect. Wilmore seemed pretty well informed (maybe from a pre-show tutorial from Penn, who several times prefaced his points with something like "As you know better than me"), but Wilmore needs to get better at summarizing for the audience some basic information that the panelists are using as assumed starting ground.

Overall, after a period in the first few weeks when I was only watching one or two shows per week, I am now watching most of 3 or 4, ( I will drop out if the panel seems off), and enjoying it significantly more than I did. There is still lots of room for improvement, but there are signs these guys are able and willing to improve. It is unfair to compare him with Colbert, whose show appeared just about fully formed. My memory is that most of the initial critical response to the first weeks of TCR was not about how good it was, but how could he possibly keep it that good with such a one note character.

--
--
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 tvor...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
tvornottv-...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TVorNotTV" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tvornottv+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Steve Timko]

The sketch they did with the guy in the "Kill Whitey" shirt seemed
like a poor copy of a Letterman field bit. Some of the earlier field
pieces like that misfired as well, such as the guy at the Puerto Rican
parade. The Stangel brothers are available. Maybe they can freelance
for the show.
Trimming the panel to three gives everyone a little more time to talk.
I wish they'd bring Bill Burr back on for another chance.

[Dave Sikula]

I find myself torn on TNS; on the one hand, he's exposing a lot of stuff - and starting a lot of conversations - that isn't getting any play in the traditional media. On the other, it feels like he has a really personal grudge against Cosby and is being less funny than just outright vicious (and I'll stipulate he's talking about an alleged rapist), and the talent pool he's using is too limited and not that funny (to me, anyway). I'm really tired of seeing the same three or four people on the panel or doing scripted pieces.

I think he's found his voice and the show is very steady, but just doesn't add up to a whole lot for me.

--Dave Sikula

[Jon Delfin]

The show is indeed improving by leaps and bounds, which made last night's tone-deaf segment on the dentist and the lion that much more disappointing (though the last part, with the eye-patched hunter, worked).