free counter with statistics The Tonight Show With Conan O'Brien Review | Pajiba - Scathing Reviews for Bitchy People

newconan6209.jpg
Welcome Back, Welcome Back, Welcome Back


"The Tonight Show With Conan O'Brien" / Daniel Carlson

TV Reviews | June 2, 2009 | Comments (59)


It’s been three months since Conan O’Brien left NBC’s “Late Night,” the show he’d hosted since 1993, to begin work on transitioning into his new role as host of “The Tonight Show.” O’Brien is only the fifth man to take the chair of “Tonight” since it began airing in 1954, but most of the chatter, rumor, and worry associated with his ascendancy to what many consider late-night TV’s throne revolved around two questions: Would he still be funny? Would the show change? The answer to both is the same: Yes, of course. O’Brien’s first show out of the gate on Monday was a pure blast of energy from one of the sharpest comedic minds in the game, and nothing was going to keep him doing a good show, his way.

But wondering if he would be able to step into the role of “Tonight Show” host not only underestimates his skill, it ignores the fundamental truth of late-night TV: People watch names, not brands. It wasn’t “Tonight Show” versus “The Late Show,” it was Jay Leno versus David Letterman. Jimmy Fallon is now the host of “Late Night,” but there’s really no such thing as “Late Night,” just Fallon’s show. He’s not hosting a new version of O’Brien’s show, just like O’Brien wasn’t hosting a new version of the show Letterman started. It’s the same with “Tonight Show.” This isn’t a regime change so much as it is a chance to let O’Brien work his magic one hour earlier. Put simply, you’re still watching Conan, and you’re still laughing.

The episode was packed with remotes — the taped pieces filmed on location — that O’Brien has had success with in the past, but the kickoff was fantastic: Having apparently forgotten to move to Los Angeles, he takes off running across the country, actually sprinting past everything from Wrigley Field to the St. Louis Gateway Arch before arriving at Universal Studios. It was a cute sequence that highlighted just great a role the themes of change, transition, and purported alienation are going to play in O’Brien’s material for a while, but it worked because, as always, O’Brien fully commits to the oddness of the humor and doesn’t attempt to hide his happiness. (He even did a brief version of the string dance that made my heart skip.) The same goes for the taped segment in which he co-hosted the tram tour through Universal Studios, then took the group on the road and bought them random gifts from the 99-cent store. It was insane and wonderful and completely Conan, and every moment was great. Will Ferrell made for a solid first guest, too, since all he and O’Brien had to do was hang out and riff a bit.

The only adjusting O’Brien will have to do will be to his new set. His old studio in Rockefeller Center was snug without being overly tight, a narrow blue rectangle of a room infused with Art Deco touches and medium lighting. He was perfectly framed at his desk, and the cityscape façade behind him looked like just that. It was homey, for lack of a better way to get a handle on the aesthetic. But his new set tries just a bit too hard to be grand, as if O’Brien needed his presence announced by angels. It’s a wide space that can feel cavernous, especially when O’Brien lands a joke and gets a big laugh from the almost 400 audience members. His old digs held just over 200 in the audience, making his new studio feel not unlike one of the traveling shows he used to do for week-long stints at universities. It’s bound to be tempting to play broader to a studio audience that’s double what it used to be, but O’Brien functions best when he can play to a controllable crowd.

Then again, I know it’s pointless to worry. O’Brien didn’t prove he could handle “The Tonight Show” on Monday; he proved it over the past 16 years. He’s on the air an hour earlier, but with the same energy and sense of humor; the theme song may sound amped up, but it’s the same tune. As O’Brien said when signing off from “Late Night” in the spring: “Sometimes I read that it’s time for Conan to grow up because he’s going to 11:30, and I assure you, that’s just not going to happen. I can’t. This is who I am, for better or worse.” He’s as good at this as he’s ever been. All we have to do is let him work.

Daniel Carlson is the managing editor of Pajiba and a TV critic for The Hollywood Reporter. You can visit his blog, Slowly Going Bald.


Pajiba Love 06/02/09 | Killshot Review



Comments

Conan would be the late night television guy I grew up with. It's odd that i've been watching him since I was 11 years old. He's a great guy that's always had a lot of heart in his humor. . . and a masturbating bear. He better show up at least once.

Posted by: adam at June 2, 2009 2:12 PM

I loved the show he did last night, but my Conan appreciation is a preexisting condition. Hopefully those who tuned in for the first will stick around.

Well the names have all changed since you hung around, but those dreams have remained and they're turned around....dammit it all, it's in my head now!

Posted by: branded at June 2, 2009 2:14 PM

When Conan took over Dave's show I gave him a chance because... well, because Dave asked us to, dammit.
Sixteen years later and I'm still glad to have given him that chance because I've been rewarded over and over again with genuinely brilliant comedy on a near nightly basis.
The man is getting his well-deserved due and kudos to NBC for getting at least ONE thing right.

Posted by: Spender at June 2, 2009 2:28 PM

First off - anything's better than Leno. I'm just saying.....
Second - I loved that intro with him running.
I think he'll be just fine.

Posted by: Odnon at June 2, 2009 2:36 PM

Loved it (though the balance was weird for Pearl Jam's performance). Everything was just as Conan-y as I hoped for. And now I don't have to choose between Conan and Craig Ferguson! It's a grand day indeed.

Posted by: Tammy at June 2, 2009 2:45 PM

Andy Richter surprised me with his pipes last night! I didn't recognize his voice until he said "I'm Andy Richter.." I'll miss Joel, and I'm worried about Andy in his role. He seemed a little awkward, the way he was standing and leaning on that podium. His posture looked uncomfortable. Te cutaways to him, the uproarious laughter... I'm too young to really know what the Ed McMahon role is like, but regardless of how it goes down, it will take some getting used to, having Andy back in the fold, just like it took a while to get used to Conan when Andy first left.

Great thoughts on the set, Daniel. It is beautiful, almost breathtaking, but does seem a little expansive.

Posted by: Matches at June 2, 2009 2:47 PM

Amazing. I'm so glad to be back in the Cone-Zone.

Posted by: Kevin Longrie at June 2, 2009 2:54 PM

Yeah, I think the major question on most people's minds isn't whether Conan will be funny -- you either already think he is or he isn't -- but whether he'll be able to draw Leno's audience.

My parents, who are late-generation boomers, love Leno and can't stand Conan. I could take or leave Leno but really, really love Conan. It could just be a generational thing.

Posted by: Caroline at June 2, 2009 2:59 PM

There is some wisdom in making the change now, Caroline, for just that reason - the generational change.
As brilliant as Carson was, his core audience aged and Leno brought in a younger generation. Conan is doing the same thing with his 'ascendance to the throne'.
And Leno's new show will be great...for me to POOP on!.

Posted by: Spender at June 2, 2009 3:05 PM

Watched the show with my mom last night and we both thought it was great. Of course, my mother had a soft spot towards Leno whereas I've always thought he was downright unfunny, so really it was her that Conan had to impress and he seemed on his way to doing so.

Of course, now I'll have to pick between Conan and The Colbert Report for my post Daily Show viewing. Curses!

Posted by: Genny (also Rusty) at June 2, 2009 3:09 PM

I never liked Leno. He did 2 bits I would watch 1) Headlines
2) Jay Walking
Other than that, I never found him funny or a good interviewer. It's just that the people who don't 'get' Letterman had nothing else to watch in that timeslot.

That being said..I thought last nights show was good and don't understand the bad reviews. It wasn't Conan's most hilarious show of the last whateverteen years, but solid.

I say good riddance to old rubbish, Mr. Leno and Hello Conan. Now i'm just going to be flipping between Conan and Letterman and having to watch the Colbert Report on reruns the next day.

And I still say they should have hired Joel McHale instead of Jimmy Fallon.

Posted by: wsapnin at June 2, 2009 3:23 PM

I loved his fit of hysterics when the bridge fake collapsed. "WHY, God, WHYYY??!!"

Posted by: Julie at June 2, 2009 3:33 PM

I attended the second test-show for Conan last week, and the set isn't actually very big... It's amazing what a wide lens can do!

I love you cone bone.

Oh man when he stopped into the Victorian Dolls store I was like... oh YES.

Posted by: AlexaCastro at June 2, 2009 3:45 PM

Oh! And if you look at the backdrop behind the Max Weinberg Tonight Show Band, you'll see the hills of Los Angeles with the Chrysler building and Empire State Building mixed in, very very cool. ;)

Posted by: AlexaCastro at June 2, 2009 3:46 PM

@wsapnin-WORD on the Jimmy Fallon comment. I wanted so badly for him to do well, but his show is painfully unfunny. The only good part is having the Roots as his band, because some of the musical performances have been effin' awesome.

Leno blows, Conan rules. I could not be happier that he took over. Even though he's still on too late for me to watch. Thank the baby jeebus for DVR.

Posted by: Jessie at June 2, 2009 4:19 PM

The only person I know who's bummed about Leno leaving is my boyfriend's dad. He also thinks Larry the Cable Guy is hilarious.
'Nuff said.

Posted by: sugar booger at June 2, 2009 4:38 PM

The time for the expunging of the large chinned monstrosity has begun. All hail The Crusading Lord Conan O'Brien.

Posted by: George at June 2, 2009 5:29 PM

Actually, even though Leno is a black hole of humor, he's not a terrible interviewer. He's not the most interesting host, but I do appreciate that he actually lets his guests tell stories and finish their sentences; even though Conan's interjections are hilarious, it irks my don't-interrupt-me! nerve when he and other hosts can't relinquish the spotlight just a smidge.

Posted by: Geetch at June 2, 2009 5:39 PM

What confuses me is this notion from some critics (and apparently most of the folks from Celebitchy) that Conan's humor is somehow "frat-boy" compared to the apparent elder statesmen like Letterman. Uh...what? How does that work?

Posted by: Vermillion at June 2, 2009 7:29 PM

Sidenote: I've been to Vegas several times, and I have NEVER seen that sign. I don't think it really exists. It's just a prop they put up for movies and shit like this. Tru fax.

Posted by: ceejeemcbeegee at June 2, 2009 9:14 PM

Wow. After reading all these worshipful Conan fans I don't think my comments are going to be appreciated. Brilliant interviewer? Never saw a worse one desperately REACHING in a vain attempt to make a clever comment and rarely if ever succeeding. How old are you people? 12? I have never really "gotten" Conan. I always thought his catapulting unknown into the original Late Night slot was more a network capitulation to the power of Lorne Michaels than to any talent Conan had. I have never seen any of this talent. The guy just doesn't make me laugh and he tries SOOOOO hard using every possible, although infantile, contrivance. Masturbating Bear? Cut me a break. The average age in that audience has to be 15. Nothing like the comedic facility of a Leno, a Letterman or even a Kimmel. And I was also getting a bit tired of the parade of the same SNL's everytime he needed a guest. Tina Fey, another minor talent with the exception of her Sarah Palin stuff, must have been given a permanent dressing room. The only thing I ever did like on his show was Triumph the Insult Dog but one thing in 16 years doesn't quite make it. Giving Conan the Tonight Show is the biggest gift NBC could possibly have given to CBS and Letterman. There now. It's no longer so one-sided.

Posted by: Lenny at June 2, 2009 9:28 PM

Lenny, This makes two of us.

I don't get Conan either. He's goofy but he's not funny. But in fairness I gave him a shot. I arrived a little late so missed the running gag (see what I did there), and checked in about the point he was describing going to the Lakers game. Tired old gag. Nothing funny there. Clock running. Then came the endless Universal Studios tour bit, which ... well, the funniest part of the whole thing was coming back from the tape and the audience chanting "Cir-cle! Cir-cle!" Conan couldn't even come up with a good ad lib to counter.

Also: I despise Pearl Jam.

Alarrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrm.

Annnnd it's over to Letterman for Top 10 list.

Posted by: , (the commenter formerly known as bucdaddy) at June 2, 2009 10:14 PM

Following this:

After reading all these worshipful Conan fans I don't think my comments are going to be appreciated.

with this:

How old are you people? 12?

is probably the most ridiculous thing I have ever read here. Really? You don't think your insinuating that we are somehow immature and childish for liking him might not be "appreciated"? That slamming the guy in this particular comments section might not be "appreciated"?

Well color me flabbergasted, how in the world you figure that?

Hey everybody, this seems to think we won't "appreciate" his little rant! I cannot fathom what would give him such an idea!

Jesus, at least the other assholes around here say their piece without such contrived bullshit like that.

By the way, there is a bit of difference between not getting Conan's brand of humor and proceeding to crap all over anyone who does. And what is up with this whole "taking it personal" vibe you seem to have? Does he really have to make you in particular laugh to be considered funny?

Posted by: Vermillion at June 2, 2009 10:16 PM

well, the funniest part of the whole thing was coming back from the tape and the audience chanting "Cir-cle! Cir-cle!" Conan couldn't even come up with a good ad lib to counter.

Why would he counter that? Seriously, I am asking. What would be a counter to a random audience chant?

Posted by: Vermillion at June 2, 2009 10:18 PM

Sorry adam but the Masturbating Bear is not gonna be back so i guess you didn't see the last week of Conan it was a huge theme of the week (as huge as it's...)

Posted by: MB at June 2, 2009 10:25 PM

Thank God some people finally told the truth about Conan. I've been trying to give that guy a chance every now and then for the last 'umpteen' years and I have yet to find anything he does even mildly amusing. I just always just assumed you had to be from New York to appreciate his humor.

Posted by: RichieB at June 2, 2009 11:35 PM

Why would he counter that? Seriously, I am asking. What would be a counter to a random audience chant?

Posted by: Vermillion at June 2, 2009 10:18 PM
---
"Counter" is perhaps not the right word. I meant: Top it with a one-liner. Johnny would have.

Instead Conan said something like "Don't do that" or whatever (it wasn't even good enough to be memorable less than 24 hours later).

Posted by: , (the commenter formerly known as bucdaddy) at June 2, 2009 11:52 PM

But he was cracking up just as much as anyone. I just don't get why he had to top it, Carson or no. And why would he try to make a "memorable" joke? I kinda thought that sort of thing wasn't something you can just turn on and off.

Posted by: Vermillion at June 3, 2009 12:15 AM

I mean, if I am understanding this correctly, the main complaint here is that Conan doesn't make jokes like other people. I mean, you don't really want him to just ape Carson, right? And isn't that pretty much the same complaint people had about Leno first time out?

Posted by: Vermillion at June 3, 2009 12:22 AM

Hmmmm ... I guess what I'm getting at is, in a battle of quips and quick wits Carson would destroy Conan. That's probably not fair, Carson would destroy most anybody, ad lib was his gift. But if you're inheriting an institution like "The Tonight Show" then you better at least be able to go a round or two with the champ. I don't think Conan can stand up because I don't think he's spontaneously funny; to the extent he's funny at all, it seems it has to be planned. Conan seems to rely a lot on filmed bits, which are (I'm guessing) written for him. For his sake I hope they are, because if they're his writing they're just not very funny (to me). Conan's idea of spontaneous funny seems to be doing that idiotic dance thing.

That make any sense?

Posted by: , (the commenter formerly known as bucdaddy) at June 3, 2009 12:41 AM

Conan is like watching a drunk frat fool try to be funny. Worst part is only he and the other drunk frat fools in the room with him get it. Nothing funny about him. Just lame and stupid. VERY LAME and VERY STUPID.

Posted by: Jfkdlf at June 3, 2009 12:45 AM

and here i thought him exclaiming 'don't chant circle!' was adorable. eh well. to each his or her own, but i thought conan was fantastic. can't wait to watch the next show in 30 minutes.

Posted by: betsy at June 3, 2009 12:57 AM

I don't think Conan can stand up because I don't think he's spontaneously funny; to the extent he's funny at all, it seems it has to be planned.

Considering Conan came from a writer's background (Harvard Lampoon, Simpsons, SNL) rather than standup, then yes, it makes sense his stuff is planned.

Thing is, Conan's bits were never straight forward jokes. Part of the humor is in how ridiculous some of the bits were. He was placed in a late night graveyard, so his stuff tended to be more off the wall than other shows.

Plus, half the time he was cracking on how cheap and horrible his own bits are. He constantly takes the wind out of his own sails. Most of your criticisms don't make sense because he pretty much brought them up first.

It just seems like there are two different audiences: an 11:30 one and a 12:30 one. The earlier ones want more Carson and Letterman (and to a lesser extent, Kimmel and Leno). The later crowd likes some Conan and Fergeson (there is quite a bit of overlap I've noticed).

And once again I ask: what is this "frat boy" nonsense people keep going on and on about?

Posted by: Vermillion at June 3, 2009 1:15 AM

I tried Ferguson a time or two, but I have a hearing deficiency that makes it particularly hard to understand British/Scottish accents, and the closed-captioning at that time of the night is usually awful.
---
Plus, half the time he was cracking on how cheap and horrible his own bits are.
---
Well, we can agree on that. However, instead of cracking on how horrible your bits are, why not try to make them funnier? Cause doesn't that get old? I mean, it's like hearing a beautiful girl go on and on and ON about how ugly she is, or fat, except in this case she really IS ugly and fat, and you know she's saying it because she wants YOU to say, "No, no, no, really, you're kinda pretty, or would be, maybe, if you lost like 75 pounds and got a face transplant, they can do that now."

The rest of it, we're just going to have to agree to disagree. You like the guy, doesn't bother me. I've got books and Letterman.

Posted by: , (the commenter formerly known as bucdaddy) at June 3, 2009 1:43 AM

However, instead of cracking on how horrible your bits are, why not try to make them funnier?

Like how? I mean, you seem to have an idea of why they apparently aren't funny. I want to know.

I've got books and Letterman.

Um...so they are mutually exclusive then?

I don't mean to target you specifically. It is just that you are the only person willing to actually talk about it, instead of jumping in, throwing in a snide comment, and then disappearing into the night.

I am trying to get this idea that Conan is somehow for folks of lesser intelligence, instead of simply a different style. I would had left it alone if it was simply a few folks saying "I don't get him" or even "I don't find him funny"; it is the vitriol some folks seem to have for the guy. You'd think Carlos Mencia was taking over the show or something.

Posted by: Vermillion at June 3, 2009 2:12 AM

Conan wasn't getting all huffy telling people not to chant "circle." He was playing funny-confused to get a laugh. "WHY are you people chanting "circle"?" And it worked.

Posted by: mightygodking at June 3, 2009 5:05 AM

Leno - Not funny but the shows that share his time slot are nauseating

Letterman - Not funny, nauseating, and irritating. I'd like to punch him in the face.

Fallon - I feel sorry for the guy for being not funny. I also feel sorry for the Roots for being the band for his unfunny and sad show.

O' Brien - There's no better alternative than Conan in any time slot. Sure he had bottom of the barrel guests during his Late Night stint but thankfully he replaced that unfunny Leno in the big leagues.

Conan O' Brien = Comedy Gold.

Tonight Show with Conan O' Brien destroys the competition.

Posted by: Joe at June 3, 2009 5:18 AM

I loved that intro with him running. good after all so good

Thanks

Posted by: website promotion services at June 3, 2009 6:22 AM

i am a fan of Conan so i guess my opinion of his new show is a little biased. however i do not understand why all of you people think Leno is not funny.

but seriously the running bit made me pee my pants a little lol.

Posted by: Pablo_420 at June 3, 2009 7:14 AM

I'm a huge Conan fan. I've loved that it doesn't seem like he's going to change his style for the new timeslot.

However, I do have to agree with the person who mentioned that Conan tends to interrupt his guests. This worked GREAT whenever he'd have a no-name guest on at 1:20 am. I always thought Conan thrived with lesser-named guests. But sometimes his interviews with stars fall a little flat. The Will Farrell one was great. The Tom Hanks one was bad, in my opinion.

Anyhow, for you people who don't seem to "get the frat-boy humor of Conan", go sip your tea and discuss literature elsewhere. We're having fun at 11:30 now

Posted by: Mikey85 at June 3, 2009 10:05 AM

Like how? I mean, you seem to have an idea of why they apparently aren't funny. I want to know.
---
Morning, Verm,

I don't know how to answer that except to say they don't make me laugh. But to be honest with you, not much of anything anymore does. I'm old but I try to resist being an old fart. Still, it's hard for me not to think "seen it all before, heard it all before, it was funny the first 100 times" etc. This applies generally, not to O'Brien in particular, because I understand that he's trying to be ... I don't know. "Edgy" isn't the right word. He's trying not to do that same old same old, I see that. I certainly don't think Conan is comedy for dummies. He simply doesn't make my laugh. But that's also true of much or most of what passes for comedy today, for me, anyway.

But I think I still have a sense of humor. I laughed at the end of "Drag Me to Hell," I laughed at "I Love You, Man," I laugh at Leno's "Headlines" (it helps I'm in the print media business). But I watch zero sitcoms (unless you count the occasional "Seinfeld" rerun) because not a one of them I've seen has made me laugh in like 10 years (granted with my work schedule I don't get to see many of them; I can't watch "The Office" for instance and I don't have the patience to record, but everything I read and hear tells me I'd like it).

Bottom line, I'm willing to chalk it up to a difference in styles and move on.

Posted by: , (the commenter formerly known as bucdaddy) at June 3, 2009 10:38 AM

Morning, Verm,

To you as well...uh ..." ,"

Bottom line, I'm willing to chalk it up to a difference in styles and move on.

Me too.

Posted by: Vermillion at June 3, 2009 11:26 AM

Conan is silly and makes me smile. If that makes me childish in the eyes of some, then so be it.
I prefer to think that I'm in touch with my inner child, and still see the joy in life.

Posted by: sugar booger at June 3, 2009 12:00 PM

After two shows, I'm very pessimistic. Seems that the return of Richter means the end of the foolish banter between Conan and Max, which is why I loved the old show. It's very disheartening that the band seems less involved. Also, what happened to Conan's trademark intro? He seems to just stroll in after the curtains unveil. Lastly it occurred to me that since the time slot has moved up an hour earlier, it could be that NBC brass would like to clean up the show content for a more broader audience. Could Triumph and the masturbating bear be history?

Posted by: Kobe2009 at June 3, 2009 5:52 PM

ceejeemcbeegee, what are you talking about the Vegas sign being a prop??? I have pictures in front of it! Just cos you're too stupid to know where it is does not mean it does not exist.

Posted by: kobe2009 at June 3, 2009 5:57 PM

There is nothing funny about Conan O'Brien. This is of course one person's opinion -I realize a lot of GenY-ers like him and so be it. His first night on the Tonight Show was an absolute disaster.

Even worse was the garage band performance by Pearl Jam - what a joke. They literally sounded like a bunch of Jr.High kids screeching back-up vocals that are a little too high and trying to play riffs that are a little beyond their ability. They just sucked.

The best thing about Conan's last show was the banter with drummer Max Weinberg, and of course that's the one thing that was cut from the Tonight Show, now that Andy R is back.

But none of that is what pissed me off - what pised me off was his attitude/demeanor/behavior when he was on Leno last week. Not one "thank you". He acted as if he was entitled to take Leno's show No grace, no class. No comedy. That's Conan.

Jay Leno is genuinely a nice guy - Conan O'Brien is a genuine snarky prick. I guarantee you he won't last at 11:30. Why? Because west coast celebs won't book on the show.

Sadly, I don't think Jay will last at 10 either.

Posted by: BloughMee at June 3, 2009 11:57 PM

I have a hard time responding to someone named "BloughMee" on here, or even taking what they're saying with more then a grain of salt, but, alas, here I go:

So really? Conan won't last cause he can't get good guests? I guess Tom Hanks, Gwyneth Paltrow, Will Ferrell, and Green Day are all just on the D-list, huh? Seriously, have you even watched Conan in the last several years? Conan hasn't been getting the same no name actors he used to get when he first started. And sure, not EVERY night is going to be a solid gold guestlist, but neither were all of Leno's shows (I believe his last week included the likes of Wanda Sykes and Lyle Lovett....????). And as for Conan being "snarky prick"....I'm sorry....what??? Conan is WAY more genuine and down to Earth than ANY other host in late night TV. He has no problem laughing at himself when a joke bombs, and he keeps his political views at bay and doesn't insult his guests unlike some other hosts *cough* Letterman *cough*. And I didn't watch the final Leno show, but I did see the first Conan one, and he made it very clear how much he respected and appreciated Leno.

I'd be curious to see people list their ages on here when they post. I do believe that Conan has a large younger following. Anybody on here comparing Conan to Carson, I think, pretty much just nixed them self from the conversation. They are nearly 20 years apart in their stints as host. Comedy has changed a lot over time. Jokes that were funny in the days of "I Love Lucy" and all the way up to "Animal House", just don't cut it anymore. It's just a generational difference. You can call it "immature" or "Frat humor", but you know what?....I didn't think Caddy Shack was funny at all (WHUUU!! How dare he!). But I sat with a nearly 50 year old relative of mine watching it, and he thinks its hilarious. Now, yeah, Carson was a funny guy....but a funny guy from a whole different generation. Older people grew up with him and his type of humor. As did many 30 to 40 something year old people with Leno. But Leno's humor was always really straight-forward and didn't take any chances. Comedy today relies on pushing the envelope and going places people didn't see coming (and "no"...I don't mean it has to be "crude", just DIFFERENT). The same people that like Carson and Leno are the same ones that think Larry the Cableguy, Jeff Dunham, and George Lopez are downright hilarious. The problem with that type of humor, is that it's too predictable, i.e., it's not intelligent or witty enough. So who really are the "less intelligent" ones? The Conan crowd or the anti-Conan crowd? I'll take a string of "Year 2000" jokes anyday over a joke about "Dippity-Dew". C'mon older people....time to grow up (no pun intended...well maybe a little). It's time to stop living in the past. Carson is gone, Leno has run his course, and The Three Stooges just aren't funny anymore. NBC can't play it's cards on old, worn out humor. Picking Conan was a golden move. He's funny, he's down-to-earth, and he's going to be the guy that our generation grows up watching every night.

And if you want cranky, tired, and sometimes too liberal of banter, I'm sure Letterman will be holding onto his spot as long as he can before CBS finds their "Conan" to take his spot.

Posted by: Sketchhog at June 4, 2009 12:23 PM

Sorry Conan, it's just not working for me. You are just to silly. Worse than Leno when he started. Most of us who watch the show are older, over 40, and your act is for 20 year olds.
We need jokes that have substance. I really didn't like Leno that much either. He often trounced on the down trodden and made fun of their faults. Where are all the good comody writers. Are there any left?

Posted by: Jim Harrison at June 4, 2009 3:53 PM

Conan is pathetic. His humor isn't funny, his gestures are strange, his interviewing style is amateurist and his skits are rediculous. What happened to all of the competent writers?

I'm going to miss Leno on the Tonight Show, but thank goodness that we'll have Jay back in September.

Conan is a good reason to start watching CBS (or anything else) at 11:30.

For those of you who like this guy, you've got to get a life!

Posted by: Dr. Glenn at June 4, 2009 10:14 PM

I am a long time Conan fan, and I wish his first week would have been a little better. But I am very thankful I can watch his show once again. When I was in my early twenties, staying up for his show was not a problem, but for the past several years I simply dont make it that late. Very glad to see Conan again and Andy Richter too. For people like Dr. Glenn above, you really should look in a mirror. Its a shame your only real reaction to opposing opinions is that somehow, because people disagree, we have no life. You're a sad sad man.

Posted by: Terry at June 7, 2009 7:09 PM

Can't stand Conan almost as much as I can't stand Jimmy Fallon. He's over the top, childish, in short: a clown. Sure Leno had some lame jokes, but I don't want to listen to a screaming middle aged man at 12am. I must be one of the only "gen-Y" persons to miss Jay. His interviewing style was mature, a good measure more intellectual and never rude like Conan comes off as often times.

I fully respect people's positive opinion of him, because there must be something there they are seeing that I am not. There was a charm in Jay that other crowds didn't see, possibly because his show wasn't "bust a gut" funny, and I don't think it was meant to be.

Adjusting to a different schedule at night is going to be weird for a while, but I'm glad Leno was replaced at the top of his game before the show had a chance to go downhill.

Posted by: Nein at June 9, 2009 3:18 AM

Howdy Americano's,

I have been watching Conan (aka Conebone) for nearly 5 years over here in Scotland. The show is on CNBC over here and we only get to see a edited 30 minutes over here.

Anyway, the new show started off well and its getting much funnier as he loosens up. Hopefully Max will become more involved as he's the perfect straight (and weird) man for Conan's off the ball comedy.

As for Leno, i always thought he delivered a better monologue than Conan but his skits were not as funny as Conan's. Gave Letterman a chance a few years back and thought he was reasonably funny although Conan's sense of humour reflects my own hence why he is numero uno and the idiots at CNBC Europe should extend the time slot so i can see the whole show.

Posted by: Thistime at June 12, 2009 5:47 AM

After Johnny Carson and Jay Leno, this guy is terrible. He has none of the skills that Johnny and Jay displayed. He's not spontaneous at all. He has no charisma. He relies on his skits for laughter. He looks awkward and unsure of himself, and its not because he's new to The Tonight Show, he's had 15 yrs. on Late Night to perfect his style! I would occasionally watch his Late Night show after Leno and couldn't understand how he got the job - he was awful. Now, he's hosting the famed Tonight Show and I'm floored. Totally obnoxious. I truly can't believe it. Almost 1/2 century of 2 unique, funny hosts coming to a screeching stop. And Andy Richter-"boob" is the only word I can think of for him.

Posted by: R.Dalli at June 16, 2009 12:10 AM

If you think Wil Farrell's last movie was funny, Jerry Springer is entertaining and TV wrestling is real,then you will enjoy O'Brien. If you have an IQ above 68 then you will not like him. To each his own.

Posted by: Marybeth at June 22, 2009 9:53 PM

You can't get much more worldly than "Coco". This guy had the audience booing about banning pornography in China and encouraged skipping out on a restaurant bill. How is this comedy? If it's not what we would teach our children, why air it? I honestly couldn't finish the one show. I don't think we are far from "Idiocracy".

Posted by: Shelby at June 24, 2009 9:09 AM

Funny that the Conan fans, above, never responded to the questions about how old they were. Yeah, Conan is going to bomb, since, as the ratings show, most of America loves Jay. Jay's jokes are for intelligent people, not kids who like jizzing bears or whatever. Sorry to see NBC made that mistake. There were several better choices. Conan is more of a Carrot Top without the toy chest. Sorry to insult Carrot Top like that, though. Perhaps this is more of a sign of how poor the execs at NBC understand their audiences in certain time slots. Someday when Letterman retires his tired old top 10 bit, perhaps I'll give his less intelligent humor a try. Without that bit though, Letterman is pretty much out of ideas, too.

Posted by: JayJay at June 25, 2009 11:18 PM

It sounds like gen-y-ers have to be force-fed in-your-face gags to be able to laugh. Anything requiring a thought or two isn't worth the effort. I wonder if Conan's success or failure will be an indication as to where America is headed, regarding maturity, world-consciousness and decency. I don't recall Johnny or Jay having to resort to indecent language or raw comedy to be funny. To answer JayJay, my guess is that we're talking about Conan fans in their mid twenties. God save us all. :-)

Posted by: Later at June 25, 2009 11:37 PM

Conan sucks!

Posted by: Jay at July 16, 2009 2:44 AM

why, how dare you older people insult those younger than you?! we've been very respectful in presenting our views so far, but i guess you people cannot do the same, or simply cannot come up with a good argument, and so must resort to bashing us. just because we enjoy watching this show doesn't mean you have any right to insult the intelligence of the younger generation.. that is downright rude and arrogant (eh-hem, Later). your statements are also completely false, as conan is witty and clever, and his show is funny. and by the way, i'm 16, and have an A+ grade average, thank you very much. just because the older generation can't deal with change and don't get the new age of comedy doesn't mean the younger people must take the insults because of it.

Posted by: simmy at July 19, 2009 11:25 PM