E-Mail:

Conan O’Brien?

Tuesday, June 9th, 2009 by leftystrat at 9:21pm
6 Responses (Add)

Ok, my pop culture tends to go missing sometimes.  Yes, sometimes for years at a time.  Apparently today was one of those episodes.

Conan O’Brien?

I purchased one of those tiny USB tuners for the computer.  It came with this boffo little antenna that I stuck up on top of my monitor farm.  I like putting up antennas because it makes people very curious as to what I’m up to.  The game for me is coming up with original answers on the spur of the moment.

For some reason the tuner worked.  I know I sound surprised but this is because I only had to install it twice to get it to work under Windows.  Windows: it’s not an operating system- it’s a virus.

[Note to Mac people: Don't get a woody - I'm a linux guy.]

The thing I quickly discovered after discovering that the tuner worked is the major problem with television today.  No matter how many channels you receive, no matter how you receive them, every one of them has absolutely zero content.  Ninety-nine cable channels of excrement.  Fifteen over the air channels of excrement.  The only difference is that the over the air inanity is free.

So while I’m desperately attempting to locate something… anything… that resembles content, I see a commercial for Conan O’Brien.  Big deal, I think.   Only this time, he’s hosting the Tonight Show.  Hosting as in he just got the job permanently (more or less).

Conan O’Brien?

Conan O’Brien hosting the Tonight Show?

Man, I must’ve skipped a few months (or years) this time for sure.

I remember watching Conan on his own show for the first time.  I was looking forward because of his reputation and writing for The Simpsons.  I was all prepared to love this show to death.

Unfortunately `death’ is the only relevant part of that statement.

I certainly wanted to like him.  It just turned out to be an impossible task.  He was hopelessly Gee-Whiz and not funny (to my under-educated funny bone).

I know unfunny.  Conan is unfunny.  Seinfeld is unfunny too, but in a more horrifying and obnoxious way.  Conan is just generically unfunny.

This indicates to me that the franchise has either been sold or given up on entirely.  Leno had some presence and could tell (and write) a joke, although I wasn’t a big fan.  Besides, I’m more the Letterman type anyway.

But Conan O’Brien?

Guess I’ll have to add this to the ever-growing list of things I just don’t get.

Tags
Categories

6 Comments

Michael Henley

June 10th, 2009
at 6:54am

For me, the Tonight Show is lost.
Conan reminds me of an obnoxious 8 year old being silly to try to be the center of attention.
Maybe he should go back to writing for the Simpsons.

leftystrat

June 10th, 2009
at 8:25am

Michael – you absolutely nailed it. Thanks for getting out what I couldn’t bring to mind.

Conan O Brien Blogs | Most Popular Searches - webmastereye.net

June 10th, 2009
at 9:36pm

[...] Conan O'Brien? ~ ThermionicEmissionsSo while I’m desperately attempting to locate something… anything… that resembles content, I see a commercial for Conan O’Brien. Big deal, I think. Only this time, he’s hosting the Tonight Show. Hosting as in he just got the job … Read more [...]

Buffet

June 11th, 2009
at 3:49am

Robert E. Howard would be spinnin’ in his grave at the thought of that pencinecked twit being named after his most famous character. Who on earth would want to watch that ultramaroon (B. Bunny) spout his drivel anyway?? Ditto sentiments on Jerry Seinfeld. Personally, I believe ‘The Leftystrat Show’ would gain a real following AND sweep the Nielson ratings. Just my opinion – but that’s the only one that counts.

buffalo

June 12th, 2009
at 10:36pm

There is no content on TV. I only have cable TV channels because it costs next to nothing given it comes with my Internet connection. The makers of TV shows have no desire to provide entertainment or joy to an audience. The sole purpose of a TV show is selling commercials to make money which requires ratings which requires doing anything it takes to get people to watch. Cheating the viewer by lying to them, mostly by delivering 30 seconds of action after 15 minutes of wallpaper, is considered good programming. Why deliver professional acting when people will watch amateurs? Why display something artfully prepared and practiced when people will watch “stupid human tricks.”

The techniques are — Never let a story come to a conclusion, always end a show on a cliffhanger, turn two characters into a romantic possibility and never let it happen, Veil the rationale for how a character acts and leak hints on every show, Present a freak show, Show how OTHER people are unbelievably and incredibly stupid, Gross them out, Lie about the contents of the show, Draw what little content there is out to an indeterminent length, Announce something that creates an artificial suspense, etc. — in short, appeal to the worst

To show more cleavage, or anything else, you only need a TV show character to need to show interest in cleavage to advance the plot. If you want to show more, you can dismember what you want to show, put it on a medical show, show it on a corpse, flash it on screen as partly blurred for a second or two because of how little was spent on the effect, or simply reduce the color saturation. Oh, and make some kind of statement that you disapprove of the necessity for showing this stuff. The attending protagonistic characters must show evidence of discomfort, disgust, disapproval, disinterest or disengagement while attending antagonistic charactters must show the opposite.

What Do You Think?